Utah immigration law still on hold despite U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Arizona case

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • prelax Murray, UT
    June 25, 2012 7:39 p.m.

    Between this and e-verify-pulling business licenses. Our legislature has the means to enforce the laws of our country.

    We will see after this election who the patriots are, and who is willing to sell out his country and countrymen for greed.

  • prelax Murray, UT
    June 25, 2012 7:35 p.m.

    How can you profile when 75-80% of the lawbreakers come from the same ethnic group? That means that 75-80% of the people arrested have to be Hispanic, or it's profiling? (percentages higher in border states)

  • azresident Mesa, AZ
    June 25, 2012 5:48 p.m.

    Let's consider children misbehaving on a playground. The playground aide (the Arizona govenor) attempts to meet her responsbilities and maintain order and safety on the playground (in the state of Arizona). When the aide reports to the classroom teacher (the President)regarding said misbehavior, the classroom teacher does nothing, which clearly sends a message to those who are misbehaving. Order and safety cannot be maintained when those who chose to misbehave (break the law!) know that the aide (the Arizona govenor) has no support from the teacher (the President).

    Ask your five year olds, or your teenagers, about the wisdom here...

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    June 25, 2012 5:07 p.m.

    I just got through reading the opinion of the Court and the dissenting opinions. Clearly the Supremes ruled that the Federal Government is in charge of immigration not the states. While they upheld the section on police officers checking the immigration status of those they stop for other legal reasons, it had a lot of provisos attached. I don't see the Utah law being upheld in light of this opinion. The liberals on the court joined Roberts and Kennedy. Even Alito's dissent was mild. Naturally Scalia and Thomas' reasoning was somewhat surreal.

    Those who are passionate about how this law should have been upheld will enjoy reading Justice Scalia's dissenting opinion. It sounds like something Chief Justice Roger Taney (the author of the Dred Scott Opinion) would come up with. It was straight out of pre-Civil War America. Naturally Thomas simply wrote four pages saying he agreed with everything Scalia said.

    Fascinating decision though. Not how I expected it turn out.

  • danaslc Kearns, UT
    June 25, 2012 4:44 p.m.

    There are a handful of men that force us to pay the entitlements so their rich friends in public office don't have to. This allows those businessmen to pay slave wages and lower the wages of all in Utah. It is just a handful that are breaking Constitutional Law. It is just very upsetting that by doing that, they are selling the citizens of Utah down the road and trying to eliminate the middle class. The problem with all of this is, what happens when all of the middle class can't pay taxes because there are no jobs? Who pays for what the businessmen are not paying and who is going to be able to afford what they are selling? A smart person would know that this is all going to crumble sooner or later.

  • wrz Salt Lake City, UT
    June 25, 2012 2:47 p.m.

    @Fitness Freak:

    "But first, the Utah legislature needs to have the WILL to enforce. Something they haven't demonstrated so far."

    Rob a bank law enforcement would be on your tail in a New York second with heavy penalties and even jail time. Rob the American people via illegal immigration and law enforcement and our elected legislators yawn and look the other way. Go figure.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    June 25, 2012 2:15 p.m.

    "Redshirt" I know of the situation you speak of. SOME employers try it....for a while. They can sometimes get away with it for years, but the IRS has several "tests" to determine if an employee is, indeed, a "contractor". Once an employer starts filing 1099's he risks the wrath (and attendant legal fees)of the IRS. Most (maybe not all)would much rather face immigration authorities rather than the IRS.

    I've heard of a few employers who have gone the route of "1099's" and severely regretted it later.

    E-Verify laws COULD be written into the bonding requirements of most all construction sites so the General Contractor COULD be held responsible for non-compliance.

    But first, the Utah legislature needs to have the WILL to enforce. Something they haven't demonstrated so far.

  • Mr. Bean Salt Lake City, UT
    June 25, 2012 1:25 p.m.

    @Fitness Freak:

    "The illegal immigration problem IS best solved by the feds. but they're not doing it."

    The federal government not upholding the law should give rise to impeachment. The feds can't arbitrarily ignore without suffering consequences.

    Congress should drag the US AG, Eric Holder, and his Homeland Security head, Janet Napolitano in and demand they uphold enforcement of immigration laws. We can't abide not having our laws enforced for political expediency.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    June 25, 2012 12:33 p.m.

    To "Fitness Freak" unfortunately there are many ways of getting around employment laws that would shield an employer from any punishment.

    For example, if I started a framing company and wanted to hire my cousin from Mexico it is easy. I make him a co-owner. That way not only do I get around having to do background checks, I also get around having to comply with any minimum wage requirements.

    I can also hire people as 1099 employees, which means that they are independant contractors and are responsible for their own taxes, and are not employed by the business.

    Some employers will simply pay cash directly to the workers to avoid having to maintain records and verification.

    It is too easy to get around eligibility checks, so unless you eliminate all loopholes, you will still have the illegal workes.

  • A_Chinese_American Cedar Hills, UT
    June 25, 2012 11:28 a.m.

    "On Monday, the Supreme Court struck down key provisions of Arizona's crackdown on immigrants but said a much-debated portion on checking suspects' status could go forward."

    This is misleading. The key provision is upholded by Supreme Court. Deseret News, please keep your left-waing writers in check.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    June 25, 2012 11:25 a.m.

    Since Bush left they are again enforcing locally. Romney cannot cater to the right wing radicals on this issue or he will lose by a wide margin. That is reality.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    June 25, 2012 11:15 a.m.

    Mandating e-verify, along with severe penalties for non-compliance would solve 95% of the problem.

    But - sadly, employers in Utah don't want that, so it won't happen.

    If Romney would simply make his position on illegal immigration clear, we would have the information we need whether to support him or not!

    The illegal immigration problem IS best solved by the feds. but they're not doing it.

  • Janet Ontario, OR
    June 25, 2012 11:10 a.m.

    Praise the Lord!